Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ BJUI Compassarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
BJUI Compass
Article . 2024 . Peer-reviewed
License: CC BY
Data sources: Crossref
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
PubMed Central
Conference object . 2024
License: CC BY
Data sources: PubMed Central
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
BJUI Compass
Article . 2024
Data sources: DOAJ
versions View all 4 versions
addClaim

Immediate or delayed trial without catheter in acute urinary retention in males: A systematic review

Authors: Veronika S. Christensen; Marius Skow; Signe A. Flottorp; Hilde Strømme; Ibrahimu Mdala; Odd Martin Vallersnes;

Immediate or delayed trial without catheter in acute urinary retention in males: A systematic review

Abstract

Abstract Objective To compare the success of establishing spontaneous micturition following immediate trial without catheter (TWOC) to delayed TWOC in males catheterized for acute urinary retention. Materials and methods In this systematic review, we included studies reporting success rates of immediate TWOC or delayed TWOC (≤30 days) among males ≥18 years of age catheterized for acute urinary retention. We excluded studies on suprapubic catheterization, postoperative/perioperative catheterization and urinary retention related to trauma. We searched the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Open Grey and Clinicaltrials.gov . The search was concluded on 30 November 2022. There were no restrictions on language or publication date. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROB 2.0 and ROBINS‐I tools. We did random‐effects restricted maximum likelihood model meta‐analyses. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Results We included 61 studies. In two randomized controlled trials (RCTs), both with some concerns for risk of bias, including in total 174 participants, the relative success rate was 1.22 (95% CI 0.84–1.76) favouring delayed TWOC. In two comparative cohort studies, both with serious risk of bias, including 642 participants, the relative success rate was 1.18 (0.94–1.47) favouring delayed TWOC. One study was excluded from this meta‐analysis because of critically low quality. Four studies reporting success rates for cohorts with immediate TWOC, all with serious risk of bias, including 409 participants, had an overall success rate of 47% (29–66). Fifty‐two studies reporting success rates for cohorts with delayed TWOC, all with serious risk of bias, including 12 489 participants, had an overall success rate of 53% (49–56). The certainty of the evidence was considered low for the RCTs and very low for the rest. Conclusion There was a limited number of appropriately designed studies addressing the research question directly. The evidence favours neither approach.

Keywords

alpha‐blocker, benign prostatic hyperplasia, urinary retention, RC870-923, Review, catheterization, trial without catheter, Diseases of the genitourinary system. Urology

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    1
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
1
Average
Average
Average
Green
gold